Yin
Junior Member
umm...let me meditate and get my answer...umm
Posts: 21
|
Post by Yin on Mar 19, 2002 20:25:42 GMT -5
for #5, it wants us to use the little-o notation...but....... WUT IS IT?  i can't find it in my notes  does anyone in Uppal's lecture, and knows which day the little-o notation was taught? thx!  |
|
JebusMeany
Junior Member
Who is Jebus Meany?
Posts: 22
|
Post by JebusMeany on Mar 19, 2002 22:35:21 GMT -5
Joel said there was an example of little o in the textbook, on pg. 191.
I haven't checked myself, but...
|
|
|
|
Post by BlingBling on Mar 20, 2002 14:26:26 GMT -5
When I looked at the example in the book it didn't make little-o notation any clearer, the way the text presents it seems to be completly different than the way it was taught in class. From what I understand o(xn) just means terms of order > n , in other words lim(x->0) (o(xn)/ xn) = 0 . However I doubt that makes things any more clear.
|
|
JebusMeany
Junior Member
Who is Jebus Meany?
Posts: 22
|
Post by JebusMeany on Mar 20, 2002 16:29:13 GMT -5
For the little-0 notation, the answers I got were
i) 12
ii) 1
But they were done pretty quickly..
|
|
|
|
Post by Majin_Blues on Mar 20, 2002 19:52:24 GMT -5
i can't find it in my notes does anyone in Uppal's lecture, and knows which day the little-o notation was taught? i don't think little-o was taught in uppal's lecture... i don't remember writing it down or having heard of it |
|
Polska
Full Member
"Let the blood of our enemies stain the battlefield" - Polska
Posts: 42
|
Post by Polska on Mar 20, 2002 19:55:48 GMT -5
JebusMeany Ive done (i) and also got 12, i havent done (ii) yet
This problem set is evil, god i thought we would keep getting problem sets which would reuire easy computation, but i guess back to using your head it is.
|
|
LiL-o
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by LiL-o on Mar 20, 2002 20:13:23 GMT -5
I don't know either since I haven't gone to class. The only thing said was by the TA and he was being instructed by a student on how to do it.
I got 12, ... how bout -6 for the other one?
for your 1? is it possible you didn't see that the bottom 1/4! factorial, and the top was 1/4 or something?
|
|
Polska
Full Member
"Let the blood of our enemies stain the battlefield" - Polska
Posts: 42
|
Post by Polska on Mar 20, 2002 20:28:33 GMT -5
i got 6 for (ii) im gonna check me signs later, but dont care right now, i hate this problem set
|
|
JebusMeany
Junior Member
Who is Jebus Meany?
Posts: 22
|
Post by JebusMeany on Mar 21, 2002 0:11:20 GMT -5
yup, you're right.
1) 12
2) 6
|
|
|
|
Post by Rogue_Knight on Mar 21, 2002 13:58:38 GMT -5
Um... although I put down 6 for the second answer as well, I'd just like to caution everyone that the polynomial expansion that we're using is for ln(x+1) and not ln(x), and that we don't really have an expansion for ln(x). And according to this, this limit approaches infinity. I'm assuming, however, that they made a typo and actually meant ln(x+1) since the polynomials cancel out nicely |
|
Darn math!!! BLUES!!!!!